Nirvana_Nut85 said:
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
Nirvana_Nut85 said:
You can scrutinize to your hearts content. The fact that you believe your scrutiny would hold any merit is why my grandiose comments I made earlier are applicable.
|
Since this an informal setting, you can claim whatever you want. But since this is also a public forum, expect at the very least to have evidence provided when its asked for.
The only reason, I haven't pursued this matter any further, is because you stated that the evidence was readily avaliable but to numerous too provide, and I gave you benefit of the doubt.
However, you do not seem to understand basic terms so allow me to use google:
scru·ti·ny
ˈskro͞otn-ē/
noun
-
critical observation or examination.
"every aspect of local government was placed under scrutiny"
Scrutiny, is not an argument, there is no merit to held by it, it is only a description of what I was doing to your argument, that is placing it under critcal observation or examination because you have no evidence.
In hindsight, perhaps I went over your head. At the same time, this dicussion wouldn't need to be had if you would simply provide evidence. Furthermore, you cannot ask me to search for the evidence yourself because the burden of proof is on you to explain your statements.
|
Seems like you have a hard on for copying and pasting definitions to use as filler as you fail to provide an intelligent response.
Tell me, what is my response to you? Or the response that you think I am trying to give you? Cause I'm only asking for more evidence.
I truly find the over my head comment amusing, considering what you've stated as scrutiny not being able to hold merit, which , is possibly the most absurd thing I've heard today and while I can provide my opinion about your scrutiny having no value whatsoever for this one I will provide links (you can argue with the writers of the following headlines)
http://www.vnews.com/opinion/6955739-95/letter-where-irs-scrutiny-is-merited
http://host.madison.com/sports/columnists/tom_oates/oates-special-scrutiny-still-merited-for-uw-s-special-teams/article_a64e81dc-138a-538e-b943-cdc91d03fc20.html
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-6988083.html
Its a shame you don't understand this so I will explain this to you.
Those links you posted are opinions about scrutiny, judging the situations in which it is acceptable.
I told you that I would not pursue your lack of evidence any further, because I gave you the benefit of the doubt that listing it would be troublesome. And that Level of Scruntiny was not be necessary for an internet forum.
Thus this statement "The fact that you believe your scrutiny would hold any merit is why my grandiose comments I made earlier are applicable." makes no sense
I can keep going but either there is a long list of people who "do not seem to understand basic terms" or clearly your wrong. I'm going with the latter.
Scrutiny is not an argument its just a term that describes the level of examination. I will continue to repeat this as long as you continue to display your misunderstanding. We have all summer.
Back to the links matter. I've argued with enough i...... to know when my time is being wasted. I can post numerous links to each one of my arguments and give a well thought reasonable debate and it will be pointless because you seem like the type that, even though the sky is blue, if you wanted it to be grey you would argue and avoid all facts.
We haven't argued! Before the side tracking of this semantics argument. You made a claim. I asked for your evidence supporting your evidence. You gave NONE
|
